Hacker News Reader

Comment by dcw303 | Hacker News Reader

there are trade offs all the way along the convenience spectrum. If you're reading HN, you're probably not in the target market for youtube apps embedded in smart tvs. But these customers do exist.

I imagine the main selling point is they don't have to connect or configure any external set top box or media pc, and they don't have to install or maintain the app. If you don't have the skills (or the time) to do so, this may be appealing.

The polar opposite would be a Linux expert running their own media center - absolute control but at the cost of said time and skills.

View on HN

I am skeptical of smart TVs and smart fridges and the like, but I like having an embedded Netflix/Youtube app because it's not harming me any -- provided the UI is snappy, the UX is good, the TV isn't spying on my pixels -cough- Vizio -cough-, and it doesn't go away like it did here.

I know these are generous assumptions, but if it saves me from having to Bring My Own Streaming Stick and I have no particular brand loyalty and/or ecosystem investment like AppleTV, Amazon, Google Play Store, PlayStation Store, then fine. It's only harmful when it doesn't work as intended, of when my 'smart' TV is so obsolete that it's no longer functional as a 'dumb' TV.

The problem is every TV manufacturer suddenly pulled a Windows 10 and thought to themselves: "Everyone already has our products in their homes, why don't we try to monetize this further? Otherwise we'll never beat Google and Apple!" So they're all trying to build 'platforms' and 'ecosystems' and the like, which is terrible value for the person who doesn't want to re-buy the same DRM'ed movie on four different platforms.

Luckily, more and more of these homegrown smart TV platforms are dying out in favor of Android/Google TV (whatever they keep renaming it to), Roku's licensed software, and Sony's PlayStation ecosystem.

> I like having an embedded Netflix/Youtube app because it's not harming me any -- provided the UI is snappy, the UX is good

People have been putting up with digital cable's crappy on demand menus for a decade, so I imagine they'll tolerate the chunkiness that smart TV apps usually have.

I bought a HiSense Smart TV because it was a good price for the picture quality. And I thought the Smart bit would be a nice plus.

But it's quite annoying. Takes a loong time to turn on and the UI is glacial and inconsistent. I use Netflix through the Xbox, and use Chromecast for other things.

Very much this. My grandparents can grab the regular old tv remote like they've been doing for 25 years and browse netflix on the tv like regular channels.

Convincing them to use a smartphone, search on the tiny screen, play, and then cast to their tv is impossible. I don't blame 'em.

I use Xbox One as a media center, works very well.

Oh god. Don't get me started on how horrendously complicated my Harmony remote was to setup.

Plus, once in awhile it goes haywire, which makes my wife's ability to use the system 10x as difficult as it would be without the universal remote in play. Because I set the system up, I understand its quirks. But when it works 99.9% of the time, the other 0.01% of the time is too difficult to train a novice on.

Whereas, in the old days, we'd both be using 7 remotes to accomplish any task, and be more or less equally proficient at it. Practice makes perfect.

My mum bought a (Sony) bluray player that, at the time, was great. It had support for Lovefilm (now Amazon), Spotify, Netflix and all sorts. It was quite expensive, but we thought it was worth it for the extras and it was highly rated as a standalone bluray player. She even paid for the overpriced USB wifi dongle.

Now it's just a bluray player. There's no support for any of the apps because they all changed their protocols (or whatever happens). Thankfully it's still useful and it's not the TV that's defunct.

It damages consumer relations a lot because now she's very cynical about buying any kind of 'smart' device. Good for her to be savvy, but bad for Sony. The people in the target market are getting screwed. Unless you buy an Android TV that has a decent chip in it, you're setting yourself up for EOL in a couple of years.

I bought her a Roku stick for Christmas and she couldn't be happier.

I have a newer (2015-ish) Sony Bravia TV with YouTube integration, along with Amazon, Netflix, and other apps like Plex. When it works, it actually works surprisingly well. But it's a very buggy system (Android OS) -- I get constant hard crashes of the entire TV, or apps crashes, etc. And in general, the interface is not as snappy as it should be. I sometimes have to completely pull the plug to restart it.

That being said, it is definitely convenient to have all these apps accessible from a main screen. The alternative would likely be switching to a different input and having to grab another remote (oh, the horror! ;) ). But I am worried about how long it will be until my "smart" tv is obsolete because all the apps are no longer compatible with their services, but I'm hoping that because it's Android-based, it will be more likely to receive regular updates.

Those people have tablets and smartphones that can use very well. Why should watching youtube on a tv be better than on a tablet? I believe it's not. It takes more time to operate and you can't walk around the house. Furthermore everybody must watch the same video, which is seldom welcome even with standard tv programs.

i dunno, i use the netflix and amazon video clients on my ethernet-connected panasonic viera plasma all the time, multiple times per week.

adding titles using my laptop, they just appear in the client and i select and play. the netflix playlist interface is pretty good, i can browse series and titles quite easily.

i've had it for 5 years now, and it still works fine. i'm going to use it until it dies, probably in the next 2-3 years.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com